- From: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 21:11:37 +0200
- To: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
>> On the other hand, the -x and -y properties do not add anything that >cannot be achieved through variables AND cause problems with logical >directions. If something is unnecessary and problematic, why have it? >They are used for animations and transitions already. I would actually >say that they are very logical. For instance when you want to move the >origin just in one dimension. It seems a lot more logical to just set >and animate a -x/-y property if that is all you want. Specifying them >does not hurt anyone IMO. If they were simply a non strictly necessary convenience, I wouldn't be opposed to them. I actually supported background-position-x/-y initially for this reason. But then I realised that while convenient, it was also incompatible with extending the property/shorthand to be able to take logical coordinates (from head/start rather than top/left). It is that incompatibility that cause me to oppose the -x and -y properties. The ability to use variables instead isn't the reason I object to them, just the reason I won't miss them much. Florian
Received on Friday, 12 October 2012 19:12:02 UTC